Commonwealth v. Cantres

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• following Bommarito, and holding that the all-inclusive statutory language of the Massachusetts Controlled Substances Act evinced a legislative intent that Wharton’s Rule should not bar conspiracy prosecutions under that law
• applying similar rationale to uphold judge’s denial of defendant’s motion for bill of particulars outlining crime on which conspiracy charge was based
• whether court lacks jurisdiction to entertain indictment that fails to state crime is question that may be raised at any time
• “[T]he judge’s allowance of the testimony implies a prior determination by him that the witness’s experience qualified him to characterize the subject of those transactions as [drugs]”
• heroin addict qualified to testify that substance defendant conspired to distribute was heroin
• a bill of particulars cannot save a defective indictment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).